LaTimes Bashes EVs, again; commenters act insane

[thankyouOB]

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-electric-vehicles-20120321,0,5459128.story" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

go read it and weep for informed reporting on cars.
also, the comments are from hell.
weigh in, if you'd like.

 

[edatoakrun]

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-electric-vehicles-20120321,0,5459128.story

go read it and weep for informed reporting on cars.
also, the comments are from hell.
weigh in, if you'd like.

I hit the new monthly 10 article free access pay-wall (never saw it coming), weeks ago.

Looks like the era of free news is coming to a close. Actually, IMO, the LAT is a pretty good paper, overall.

I may even pay for it!

 

[thankyouOB]

use a different browser.

 

[lpickup]

Same friggin' story we've read over and over, new "quote" from some guy the oil companies probably pay as a consultant.

 

[thankyouOB]

has he ever ridden in a Versa?
i guess he dont love that blue tooth and nav.

 

[Randy]

http://earthfix.nwpr.org/energy/article/interstate-5-goes-electric-from-canadian-border-to/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another photo, same guy...Sure looks to me like he doesn't even have a Chademo connection on his car?

He's either "fake charging" or plugging in at L1/L2 at the "Grand Opening" of the DC Fast Charge network....(?)

Shoulda bought the SL model, Bruce!!!!

 

[edatoakrun]

use a different browser.

“Compared to a Nissan Versa, a Leaf owner would have to hold on to the Leaf for seven years in order to recoup the price difference through fuel-cost savings even if gas prices rise to $4 per gallon...

If?

Can you find $4 gas, in LA, today?

What are the odds, you'll be able to find it for $4, in 2019?

Thanks for the tip.

So, 10 free articles, per browser, per month?

I wonder if that works with the NYT, which just cut its free access, again.

 

[SkiTundra]

What specifically is inaccurate in the article?

 

[edatoakrun]

What specifically is inaccurate in the article?

It's basically an opinion piece, reporting the opinions of "Lacey Plache, the chief economist for Edmunds.com".

So the question is not accuracy of the facts, it is the quality of the opinions expressed, a highly subjective question.

And they are of very low quality, In my opinion, due to the many examples of poor reasoning in the article, such as the one regarding comparative fuel costs, that I posted above.

 

[lpickup]

What specifically is inaccurate in the article?

Which article, the first one?

Maybe not inaccurate as much as misleading. See my comments on the story for specifically what I think is misleading about how the "facts" were presented.

 

[SkiTundra]

See my comments on the story for specifically what I think is misleading about how the "facts" were presented.

Yes, the first article. Where are your comments?

 

[SkiTundra]

So the question is not accuracy of the facts, it is the quality of the opinions expressed, a highly subjective question.

And they are of very low quality, In my opinion, due to the many examples of poor reasoning in the article, such as the one regarding comparative fuel costs, that I posted above.

So, what specifically is off with his opinion and reasoning. As far as I can see everything he said is true (though I haven't run the numbers to see if his payback period is reasonable).

 

[EricBayArea]

Is it a coincidence that if you click on the image at the top it takes to you to "The 10 worst cars sold in America." :?

 

[lpickup]

See my comments on the story for specifically what I think is misleading about how the "facts" were presented.

Yes, the first article. Where are your comments?

They are posted on the LA Times site with the article (maybe you have to click on View Comments to get them all to come up).

To summarize my rebuttal points:

- There may only be 2600 PUBLIC charging stations in the US, but nearly every single EV owner has a charging station available to them right in their garage and that's all the majority will actually need. You can't compare # of gas stations to # of public charging stations in any meaningful way.
- He claims that charging a vehicle only at home is insufficient for SOME consumers. Yes, you could say that's true. You could legitimately make that claim if there were 2 consumers out of tens of thousands. It's misleading though because again for the vast majority of EV owners, charging only at home IS sufficient.
- He claims that other consumers are plagued by range anxiety. Again, very vague use of the term "other". You could make that claim if 2 more out of those tens of thousands of consumers have range anxiety. My admittedly unscientific experience (but I'm not writing a newspaper article either--if I was I would at least do a minimal survey) is that the vast majority of EV drivers do not have range anxiety beyond the first 2-4 weeks of ownership.
- The whole comparison of the LEAF to the Versa and the Volt to the Cruze is misleading as those cars aren't really in the same class with each other. Hey, if I'm free to cast somewhat arbitrary comparisons maybe I'll just put the LEAF up against an H2 and be done with it (okay, I'm exaggerating here...)
- Yes, there are higher efficiency vehicles on the market, but they STILL are only about 1/4 of the way to an EV, and even more misleading, thanks to a post I recently read here that spells out the facts, is that for the 40MPG Cruze, you need to get a standard transmission and a very specific (and expensive) trim package that significantly raises the cost of the car. If you get an auto transmission with the lower end trim package you're lucky to get 30 MPG.

 

[SkiTundra]

To summarize my rebuttal points: ...

Excellent points.

They do not invalidate anything he said though. He's at most guilty of some omissions, as you've pointed out.

The vast majority of EV owners may not have range anxiety, but I think the vast majority of potential buyers do, and rightly so. An EV is a great vehicle for a few people, but likely not for most. Yet. For most people the ubiquitous availability of very fast DC charging is a requirement. They make enough trips, even if only once a month, that they need a vehicle that can make that trip without too much inconvenience.

I mostly agree on the comparisons. Neither the Versa nor Cruze hold any interest for me. The ONLY reason I'm interested in a Leaf is because it's 100% electric. I'd guess that's the case for many or even most buyers of 2011, 2012, and maybe even 2013 buyers. However, comparisons to ICE are necessary and the comparisons he made are perhaps the best.

 

[Randy]

Doesn't anyone think it is pretty ironic that a press event for DC Fast Charging features a car that can't do it?

 

[lpickup]

He's at most guilty of some omissions, as you've pointed out.

Yes, that's the point! It's completely biased. It's not responsible reporting (okay, so maybe this is just an op-ed anyway and not sold as reporting anyway). You can't possibly think that there was not an agenda in play by focusing (and grossly exaggerating in my opinion) on the negative aspects without even mentioning a single positive. :?:

The vast majority of EV owners may not have range anxiety, but I think the vast majority of potential buyers do, and rightly so.

I totally agree with you there, and I think it is entirely fair to point that out in an explicit fashion as you just did there, not to choose your words wisely so that it appears that owners continuously experience range anxiety, while being technically correct because you used the word "consumers" and meaning potential buyers.

An EV is a great vehicle for a few people, but likely not for most.

Here is where we part ways. I just don't buy that. I think that most people THINK it would not be a great vehicle for them because (a) they are too ingrained in the gas station paradigm and (b) they simply overestimate their daily driving patterns. Survey after survey has been done that shows that 90% of the public has a daily drive within 40 miles.

For most people the ubiquitous availability of very fast DC charging is a requirement.

No, again I believe that is the minority. For MOST people, I do agree that the ubiquitous availability of a very fast DC charging network is a security blanket (and that's not an insignificant statement), but not a requirement.

They make enough trips, even if only once a month, that they need a vehicle that can make that trip without too much inconvenience.

For single-car families/individuals that have this frequency of extended trips, there is a car for them. Either the Tesla-S if their trips are confined to 300 miles or the Volt if cost/range are a further concern.

Now if you had made the argument that COST is a concern, then I'm at least willing to say that yes, there are a good number of people out there who can't afford the investment of a new car, even if it will ultimately produce a return. But that's okay, they can't make enough now to keep up with demand anyway, and a batch of used cars coming off lease will be available soon. But as long as there continues to be demand to keep up with supply, that's no reason to knock the vehicles.

However, comparisons to ICE are necessary and the comparisons he made are perhaps the best.

No, definitely not the best. Compare the cars to ones that have similar features like built-in NAV, bluetooth, heated seats, cruise control, fog lights, intelligent key system, not the bottom of the line econo-boxes. True, it might be somewhat difficult to find an ideal match because the LEAF is missing some key "luxury" features like electric seats, leather interior, dual zone climate, sunroof. But it is not an electric Versa!

 

[thankyouOB]

use a different browser.

“Compared to a Nissan Versa, a Leaf owner would have to hold on to the Leaf for seven years in order to recoup the price difference through fuel-cost savings even if gas prices rise to $4 per gallon...

If?

Can you find $4 gas, in LA, today?

What are the odds, you'll be able to find it for $4, in 2019?

Thanks for the tip.

So, 10 free articles, per browser, per month?

I wonder if that works with the NYT, which just cut its free access, again.

i dont think it does.

 

[thankyouOB]

To summarize my rebuttal points: ...

Excellent points.

They do not invalidate anything he said though. He's at most guilty of some omissions, as you've pointed out.

The vast majority of EV owners may not have range anxiety, but I think the vast majority of potential buyers do, and rightly so. An EV is a great vehicle for a few people, but likely not for most. Yet. For most people the ubiquitous availability of very fast DC charging is a requirement. They make enough trips, even if only once a month, that they need a vehicle that can make that trip without too much inconvenience.

I mostly agree on the comparisons. Neither the Versa nor Cruze hold any interest for me. The ONLY reason I'm interested in a Leaf is because it's 100% electric. I'd guess that's the case for many or even most buyers of 2011, 2012, and maybe even 2013 buyers. However, comparisons to ICE are necessary and the comparisons he made are perhaps the best.

tundra,
do you have a Leaf, or are you just speculating from the sidewalk?

 

[lenny]

I mostly agree with SkiTundra. I don't find any factual errors in that article, though it is obvious he did not provide the "but it works for these group of people because...".

I do own a Leaf, drive it daily, and really like the car. But even knowing what I do now, I would not buy it if it is the only car in the family, or replace the other ICE with an EV. I did not buy it mainly to save money on gas. And I don't believe the current gas prices, even $5 a gallon, will encourage mass adoption. Few Americans will look at the long term total cost of ownership - you have to admit that as a nation, we're extremely short sighted and always focus on the short term. Not that we're unique in this respect, of course.

I don't think we need to break out the pitchforks and torches every time there's an article that's negative about EVs, unless there's outright lies being told. Doing so would just give the anti-EV folks another excuse to point and sneer. Correcting the omissions in the discussions there is good though.